Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Don't you hate it when people refute established/proven facts?

  1. Apr 27, 2005 #1
    Don't you just hate it when someone, usually an idiot, blatantly denies or refutes an established fact?

    One of these situations came up today. A girl in one of my classes tried to claim that evolution is just a theory and isn't any more proven than (biblical stuff). I tried to explain to her that evolution has been studied, witnessed, and isn't even up for debate. Whether or not it was the start of creation as we know it is what is widely debated.

    Another example of this that I have come across is the existence of the G-spot in women.

    Also, the majority of germans still believe that wind blowing on them (even in 90-degree weather) will cause them to get sick.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 27, 2005 #2

    dextercioby

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Is she the same girl with the evolution denial...?If so,make her an offer she can't refuse... :wink: :tongue2: :devil:

    Daniel.
     
  4. Apr 27, 2005 #3
    There's no cure for ignorance.

    On the other hand, I often meet new theorems with skepticism until I fully understand the proof. Until then, I refuse to acknowledge it. I guess it's kind of hypocritical.
     
  5. Apr 27, 2005 #4

    dextercioby

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Since u mentioned 'theorem',I completely trust mathematics...Never failed me so far,on the other hand,i failed her...

    Daniel.
     
  6. Apr 27, 2005 #5

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I dont believe in integrals! lol

    What i also hate is when someone says they dont 'belive' something even when theres a huge amount of proven facts to back it up or its highly. For example, that earthquaek that caused that tsunami; scientists said the earths rotation was altered a tad bit and some people i know go "oh i dont believe that for a second". Or you can go "no, that steam from that nuclear power plant is not dangerous" and people will go "i dont believe that!". I also hate when people make stupid assumptions based on the situation. For example, another nuclear example matter of fact, when people go "We can't build mroe nuclear power plants! They will blow up and white out the whole city". Now, unfortunately the real 'disaster's effect is much worse, but i hate when people say that because they think of nuclear bombs and hear "nuclear" power plant and they just connect the two immediately.
     
  7. Apr 27, 2005 #6

    dextercioby

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    There's a ****load amount of evidence that integrals exist...:tongue2:

    Daniel.
     
  8. Apr 27, 2005 #7

    Danger

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Skepticism is good; it's what keeps science honest. Blindly refusing to allow for the reality of something that's possible, let alone proven, is where the ignorance comes into it. The best way to deal with it is to either ignore it, or to propose something utterly implausible sounding, that you can prove beyond any shadow of doubt right before their eyes after they've being going on about the impossibility of it for several minutes. (Preferably done in front of an audience. :devil:)
     
  9. Apr 27, 2005 #8

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I like when people say atoms dont exist because you cant see em.

    Well i look out and cant see New york city but hey, i think its there ;)
     
  10. Apr 27, 2005 #9
    Well, you know, that's a philosophical question. Do atoms exist or are they only a good mathematical model? I'd say that the line between those two things may not exist, for anything. But if you take existence as opposed to modeling as concrete daily reality, then yes, it would not be implausible for a smart educated person to deny atoms, although he would have to note that atoms as abstract concepts do provide much explanatory power for certain things.
     
  11. Apr 27, 2005 #10

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    I think it's relatively safe to say that atoms exist. There is something underlying all of those chemical equations that the word 'atom' refers to. The real philosophical question is what exactly these atoms are, not just functionally, but ontologically.
     
  12. Apr 27, 2005 #11
    It is relatively safe to hold that atoms exist and also tenable to hold that they do not exist. Almost anything at all can be said not to exist on the basis that it is merely an explanatory device with no deeper significance, since almost anything is only known through effects that might be produced by that thing's existence but also, in every case, might arise for other reasons. I may be about to sound stupid because I have been reading Brian Greene's popular science presentation and have no actual knowledge of this, but I so gather that in some string theories dimensions can have size R, and in others the corresponding dimensions have size 1/R, yet these theories are equivalent because of other factors. It's not impossible to imagine that in a similar fashion at some time in the future the idea of atoms may be replaced with some other, equivalent idea, or perhaps with an idea with greater explanatory power.
     
  13. Apr 27, 2005 #12

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    lol well we're normally not going "God these people are idiots" when arguing with people on such highly philosophical reasonings. Plus in a sense, we do know atoms exist as far as "something incredibly small with these dimensions and characteristics that we can see that meets the correct dimenions". This may actually be all that you need because that basically is the basis for "proving" anything exists. Ever see that IBM thing.... let me get it...

    http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/atom-ibm.jpg

    Check that out :D One of my physics profs likes that lil thing. He says theres a joke out there that says another one was made that said "Bill Gates Sucks" lol.
     
  14. Apr 27, 2005 #13

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    My point was that, whatever you call them and whatever they are, something real is referred to by the word 'atom.' In fact, we can actually directly observe molecules using powerful electron microscopes. Something is there, whether or not it conforms to any currently accepted model.
     
  15. Apr 27, 2005 #14
    Certainly something is producing the results of those experiments that are currently explained by atoms, but if the mechanism producing that is nothing like the current conception of an atom, or more accurately if it is possible to conceive of some mechanism producing that which is nothing like the current conception of an atom and has greater explanatory power, then would the people now calling the mechanism "atoms" be wrong? In that circumstance I think they would.

    Personally, I do believe in atoms, although I care less about what supposedly "is" there than I do about how things functionally interact, one reason I'm in computer science.
     
  16. Apr 27, 2005 #15

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Well when you argue with someone on the idea of atoms, they usually think the whole idea of something that small is propostorous because they cant see it with their naked eye
     
  17. Apr 27, 2005 #16
    That is a good point that most people denying the existence of atoms haven't thought it through so much. In that case I think that they probably should be judged on their real reasons for denying the existence of atoms. If they are doing it for blind religious reasons ("it's not in the Bible") or if they are doing it because the whole "science" thing is confusing to them and they're in denial of it, then yes, they are merely denying established facts. Idiots.
     
  18. Apr 27, 2005 #17
    If that's their reason, they are denying atoms because the concept seems unusual and they don't want to change the way they think. Not an excuse.
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2005
  19. Apr 27, 2005 #18
    I agree that many, many people have very very bad logic when it comes to denying things.

    "Raw cookie dough is fine, I've eaten it all my life and I haven't died yet."
     
  20. Apr 27, 2005 #19

    JamesU

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    have you ever heard of a scanning tunneling microscope? it can see atoms. :wink:
     
  21. Apr 27, 2005 #20

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Yah i posted that pic of the IBM thing lol.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Don't you hate it when people refute established/proven facts?
  1. Gawd i hate these people (Replies: 17)

  2. People you love to hate (Replies: 12)

Loading...